Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fictional Pharaohs


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete. Cirt (talk) 22:20, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

List of fictional Pharaohs

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Unreferenced and indiscriminate list of characters. Except for two of them, they have don't even have links here. The two that are linked, have no articles: a dab and a link to a video game. Pcap ping  13:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  00:47, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete essay. Could be an encyclopedic topic, but it's so far from that right now that it's better to start over from scratch. If someone is seriously interested in adopting it and cleaning it up, it can be userfied in the interim. r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 14:35, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, I agree with the nominator that this list is unreferenced and unsourced, and also I think a list of fictional pharaohs isn't even needed, because I think all there is to these characters is the fact that they're pharaohs, there's nothing singularly notable about any one of them. J I P  | Talk 19:35, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep no sillier than any other lists of fictional elements (swords, vehicles, etc.) which have been kept at AfD. Cleanup is always good. Jclemens (talk) 21:11, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I didn't nominate it because it's silly, but because it's unsourced and entirely composed of characters that don't have their own articles. Pcap ping  13:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge into Pharaoh, as a section "Pharaohs in fiction" 70.29.210.242 (talk) 05:25, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * cmt: Das Baz, the article creator, has left a highly convincing, well-thought-out keep rationale at his talk page. Apparently "it's fun" is now a reason not to delete an article. r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 21:22, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep - Although this is not the most elegant of lists, it certainly can be improved with sourcing.  I quickly found two and added them.  As for entries not having their own articles, that's not a requirement, as long as they are sourced and in the context of the list subject.  Most bibliography entries don't have their own articles so we shouldn't be creating double standards.--Mike Cline (talk) 04:21, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete the collection of fictional Pharoahs itself isn't notable, as there is no encyclopedic tie-in between all of the different fictional stories that have a character called a Pharaoh. I haven't found any reliable sources that mention more than one of the given pharaohs on the list together. We shouldn't compile lists that haven't already been compiled in the past.  Them  From  Space  05:47, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - list of insignificant, non-notable characters. If they were all notable and covered by separate articles, then I would take the opposite view. Racepacket (talk) 19:10, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.